27: Astros (Peacock) @ Phillies (Velasquez)

LoneStarPhan 2017-07-25 03:56:44 UTC #25

Update on the game.
Seventh inning: Astros add two runs to go up 12-1. In the bottom of the inning, Phillies score three runs (bases loaded triple by Williams) to make it 12-4.

LoneStarPhan 2017-07-25 04:14:56 UTC #26

End of 8: still 12-4.

Phillies got a lead off single (Herrera) and a two out walk (Perkins), but Rupp finished off the inning with the not usual 3 pitch K (swing, swing, called).

bkox 2017-07-25 04:16:32 UTC #27

I really like Nick Williams

LoneStarPhan 2017-07-25 04:36:43 UTC #28

Hernandez and Williams had singles in the ninth, but sadly, Kendrick pinch hit and grounded into a game ending DP, 5-4-3.

Astros 13-18-1
Phillies 4-10-1

Hernandez had 3 hits tonight; Herrera and Willieams 2 each.

bkox 2017-07-25 05:14:53 UTC #29

EDmuch 2017-07-25 12:29:55 UTC #30

Maybe Velaquez really is a reliever.

Lawman 2017-07-25 12:33:15 UTC #31

Just the way he's been starting games, makes me wonder the same thing. I wonder if he has a "closer's mentality." I'm not saying to have him make the transition now, and having him be a good starter is clearly the goal..... but a dominant closer does have value if that is to be the endgame with him.

California_Dreamin 2017-07-25 14:56:17 UTC #32

Still wish we hadn't changed the terms of the Giles for Velasquez deal. Because the irony is that we asked for Appel instead of Fisher due to concerns about Velasquez's arm and we not only ended up with a pitcher [Appel] who DOES have a bad arm but relinquished a power hitting outfielder [Fisher] who is ranked #54 in BA's latest rankings, would probably be playing in Philadelphia right now, and gave tem young infielder Arauz in the deal.

I still believe the Phils are PR conscious, though not as bad as they used to be, and will try really hard not to have to move Velasquez to the bullpen because if they do, they will be criticized [rightly I believe] that they gave up an outstanding closer for a guy that they now HOPE will become one.

I recall at the time that many on this site [and I agreed with them] said that Klentak/McPhail absolutely had to get the Giles deal right since he was such a valuable trading tool [much better than anyone we are offering now] and promised a return of several players.

I wish they had not changed the deal, if the Phils had Fisher and given how Altherr and Williams are hitting, they sure would have had some powerful outfield trade prospects on board the system. Could be wrong but Fisher looks to me like a 30 home run hitting outfielder and they are hard to find.

julio 2017-07-25 20:05:43 UTC #33

Livin' in the past, CD. If Derek Fisher has a decent, long MLB career, you're going to be bringing this up for years, aren't you?

California_Dreamin 2017-07-25 20:41:28 UTC #34

Fair enough julio. I noticed Fisher just got recalled and is in the lineup tonight. If he does well I wonder how difficult it will be for posters to refrain from mentioning what I just mentioned out of concerns about "living in the past?"

Based on the lively discussion I have been reading on this site today, most of what is being discussed concerned past decisions or indecisions. And whether we want to admit it or not, these Fisher like decisions are ultimately the kinds of things that make some teams successful and others unsuccessful. Fisher was no Hunter Renfroe rumored acquisition, he was in the deal. And the next day he wasn't and we had to sacrifice Jonathan Arauz alone with Fisher. For Mark Appel.

If you can't ruminate on those kinds of decisions, why even spend a minute trying to evaluate Klentak's abilities or inabilities as a GM. Because right now this is the only big deal he has pulled off.

zambonir 2017-07-25 23:09:01 UTC #35

We got an Arauz back when the deal changed too.

I can't really blame them for wanting Appel. Even with his issues it looked savvy, Appel's perceived value was higher, period, and the philosophy of simply needing more pitching (in general and because you couldn't count on Velasquez for lots of innings) still seems correct. The surprise is that the Phillies actually have OFs - Fisher's absence would have stung a bit more in a world where Alther and Williams weren't coming on.

If anything it's a little disappointing that the Phillies didn't have a scouting report that told them to stay away from Appel, the question is did they have one that really made them think he could turn it around or were they just doing with the conventional wisdom/history/pedigree?